Subject to certain conditions, employers are required under sections 259–261 of the Pensions Act 2004 and the Occupational and Personal Pension Schemes (Consultation by Employers and Miscellaneous Amendment) Regulations 2006 (the Pension Consultation Regulations), SI 2006/349, to consult with members or their representatives before making certain 'listed changes' that affect occupational or personal pension schemes. This is discussed in Practice Note: Pension consultation requirements. In summary, this means that employers must consult if: • they employ in Great Britain at least 50 employees • they are not an excluded employer (in the context of a personal pension scheme, they will

Commercial analysis: In Sheikh Tahnoon Bin Saeed Bin Shakhboot Al Nehayan v Ioannis Kent , Leggatt J held that Sheikh Tahnoon Bin Saeed Bin Shakhboot Al Nehayan (Sheikh Tahnoon) owed Ioannis Kent (Kent) an implied duty of good faith. This duty arose out of an oral contract between the parties whereby they entered into a joint venture as equal shareholders. Detailing what Leggatt J describes as a ‘story […] all too familiar’, the case recounts the story of two friends entering into business together, the subsequent breakdown of their friendship, threats of personal violence, and the disintegration of a multi-million euro business. Importantly, in practice, the case serves as a warning to commercial entities that the English courts may imply a duty of good faith into certain commercial agreements. Written by Oliver E. Browne, partner at Latham & Watkins LLP, London.

The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/3134 (CCR 2013) apply to contracts between a trader and consumer entered into after 13 June 2014. The CCR 2013 deals with three types of contracts, as defined in CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134, reg 5: • off-premises contracts—there are four types of off-premises contract as defined in regulation 5 • distance contracts • on-premises contracts—this is defined as neither an off-premises contract nor a distance contract which, in effect, means a contract made on business premises Contracts are divided into the following categories, as defined in CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134, reg 5: • sales contracts • service contracts • digital contents The CCR 2013 provides that specific information must be given to the consumer and confers a right of cancellation in certain cases. If a right of cancellation exists, the requisite information must include a cancellation

For the purposes of this Q&A, we have assumed that: • the consumer is a natural person who satisfies the relevant definitions of ‘consumer’ in the various legislation referred to below and took all the steps necessary on their part for the conclusion of a consumer contract in Scotland and is deemed to have their habitual residence (as defined by applicable legislation) there • the English company is acting in the exercise of its trade or profession and pursues its commercial or professional activities to which the contract relates in Scotland or by any means directs such activities to Scotland or to several countries including Scotland • the position in respect of non-contractual claims (eg tort, delict and negligence) has not been considered Unfair terms Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015), terms in business-to-consumer (B2C) contracts must be fair and transparent.

Dispute Resolution analysis: Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE, found that a different dispute had been resolved in a second adjudication where the adjudicator was asked to carry out a valuation of the works. Daniel Goodkin of 4 Pump Court Chambers considers the judgment and its implications.

Part I of the LTA 1987 gives qualifying tenants the right of first refusal on a proposed disposal by the landlord of a relevant estate or interest in land. The broad scheme of LTA 1987 is as follows: • where the landlord proposes to make a ‘relevant disposal’, LTA 1987, s 5 requires that the landlord serve on the tenants a notice (an ‘offer notice’) which must comply with the relevant requirements of LTA 1987, ss 5A–5D (depending on the nature of the proposed disposal) • the offer notice must specify a period

The limitation period imposed by section 5 of Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) stipulates that any claim for breach of contract must be brought within six years from the date of breach of where the contract is a simple contract. Time runs from the date of breach rather than the occurrence

The legislative purpose of the statutory declaration mechanism is to ensure that if a tenant has less than 14 days to consider its position, then there should be a process to match the safeguards previously offered by the old procedure where a court order was necessary in order to contract out in line with the well-established and legally tested procedure under Statutory Declarations Act 1835 (SDA 1835). There is no requirement for the completed tenant's declaration to be served on the landlord. The tenant

What are the consequences if the employer fails to appoint an engineer? The precise consequences of the Employer’s failure to appoint an Engineer are likely to depend on the particular circumstances and the impact of that failure on the Contractor. For example, where the Employer’s default, ie the failure to appoint an Engineer, causes the Contractor delays, then the Contractor may be entitled to an extension of time, following the procedure in clause 20 of the FIDIC 2017 contract. The Contractor would need to be able to demonstrate how the Employer’s failure to appoint an Engineer, or the

Arbitration analysis: The German Federal Court of Justice upheld the partial enforcement of a Swiss-seated ICC award against Libya arising from a military procurement contract. It held that the acquisition of military communications equipment and related services constituted non-sovereign commercial conduct and therefore did not attract state immunity. The court also distinguished recognition and enforceability from subsequent execution, confirming that potential immunity of particular State assets does not preclude an enforcement declaration. Libya could not rely on internal approval requirements to challenge its capacity to arbitrate under Article V(1)(a) of the New York Convention. The decision strengthens the position of award creditors seeking enforcement in Germany against states engaged in commercial transactions. Produced in partnership with Lucie Gerhardt of Noerr PartGmbB.

The original covenantee can always enforce an express covenant against the original covenantor under the doctrine of privity of contract, provided that the covenantee has not expressly assigned the benefit of the covenant to a third party. Accordingly, it is possible for a covenant to be enforced against the original covenantor even after the covenantor has disposed of his interest in the land concerned. Where the original covenantor remains potentially liable following a disposal of

1 The full legal and beneficial ownership in the Retention shall remain